My club does an annual G/25;d3 quick-rated quads. Many scholastic organizers around here use G/25;d5 for the K-3 sections.
Yes, but I assume, (uh oh) that you included “d3” and probably “QC” in the advertising, in CL and elsewhere, right? Not to mention it’s a ‘Quick’ Chess event. As noted in the relevant part of the Rules Updates to the 5th Edition doc, it’s the border cases that most need to be clear: especially G/25-G/29.
I agree that USCF should require TLAs to include delay/increment info. But…
…What I think Brennan Price is saying—and if so I agree—is that players have become so used to the standard delays that mandating that all publicity include full delay/increment info is asking for confusion—and possibly trouble from the rare chess lawyer.
When a tournament player sees G/15 he knows that means QC with 3-second delay, unless noted otherwise. If it is announced otherwise at the site, most players won’t care, since it’s just QC.
If he sees G/60 he knows that means a 5-second delay. If a 10-second delay is announced at the site some players might grumble, but since that only affects QC—by moving it out of the Quick/Dual range—there still won’t be a revolt.
But now we get to the trouble zone.
What happens when a chess lawyer who likes trouble shows up at a tournament that has no TLA but is advertised in flyers and email as “G/30” and insists that no delay (d0) be used, since no delay was specified in pre-tournament publicity—even private publicity not in CL?
Yes, that won’t happen often. Yes, that player will make enemies instantly—but some of ‘them’ like that. I have a friend who directs small G/40 or G/60 one-day tournaments. He advertises them on a private web site and through email. Thanks to nagging from me and others, he now includes “d/5” in the info—but until recently it was just “G/40.”
So, had our chess lawyer friend appeared at one of those events, under current rules…on what grounds would you tell him it’s 5-second delay and he can take it or leave?
In principle I agree that full info on time controls is a good thing. I question if it’s worth even a small chance of losing even one member over the potential for trouble caused by the quest for Accuracy.
Disclaimer: I look at all the Oklahoma crosstables on MSA because I used to live there. This information should not be construed to say that I think Oklahoma is an outlier in any way.
Many Oklahoma tournaments have non-standard delay or increment. Some have neither, usually quick-rated, where some have 10, 15, or even 20 seconds of increment, with the base time reduced so that it qualifies for dual-rating.
One major organizer appears to have a standard of 10 seconds delay, and a few other people have followed him.
The reason that G/25;d5 is regular rated is the same as we see those hideous games with terminal time controls and no delay/increment. People are trying to get games completed (and in some cases regular rated) in the shortest possible amount of time.
Alex Relyea
I’m not sure I caught everything, but from a quick perusal of OCA, OCF, and OSCO, it appears that OCA and OCF are in compliance. In fact, all of these events apparently use a specified non-zero delay, usually d5. I found no d0.
OSCO is another matter. All of these events (that I found) were given as G/nn, with no mention of either delay or lack thereof. There was nothing in the FAQ, either.
Of course, one could argue that, since most OSCO events are not USCF-rated, they can do whatever they please. But, in at least one event, the top section is USCF-rated, and still there is no mention of delay one way or the other.
Bill Smythe
Yep, that’s what I’m talking about. That’s why explicit mention is necessary.
You didn’t, as long as you included “G/25 d3” explicitly in your TLAs.
I assume, then, you’re also proposing that the event type be determined by the base time alone, regardless of the delay.
That ship, however, has sailed. For one thing, under your proposal G/25 d5 would be quick-rated only. At least one medium-size organizer, who has run successful events like this for many years, has strongly objected to this idea. I think several other organizers are in this boat, too. It’s unlikely the clock will ever be turned back to the days when event type was decided by base time alone.
Bill Smythe
Well, as a relatively new chess player, I can say that I really appreciate it when the delay (whether d5, d0, i30, whatever) is always specified. Not having grown up with any notion of a standard delay, if I’m at a tournament and it’s not specified, I always ask. The answer has never been consistent. Sometimes it’s d5 and sometimes it’s d0. Standard? What standard? Please specify it and then everyone knows. What’s the harm in that?
I do find it funny that some of the arguments center around the mythical “rules lawyer” who insists on a particular delay even if the organizer intended something else. Really, what right does the player have. It’s the organizer’s tournament. He can put whatever time control he wants. But like I said above, if it is specifically specified, then everyone knows what it is. There’s no confusion. We all benefit.
The organizer is not excused from the obligation to follow the USCF Official Rules of Chess – all of them – except as suitable advance notice is provided to players.
No, we can keep the revised rules for that, and organizers can feel free to specify a nonstandard delay in order to obtain rating under a particular system(s). Let G/25 d5 be dual rated, but don’t make the person who uses the standard three second delay specify d3.
What I object to is the expectation that those who use the long established unstated standards must alter their practices because a few people want to use something other than the standards. It’s a big paradigm shift to ask. Micah has called out two instances where not even USCF has met the new standard in advertising for its own events in its own media. If not even the Federation can get it right after two years, we cannot expect others to get it right with a straight face, particularly in advertising media over which USCF has no control.
The standard delays are needed to fill gaps when a delay is unspecified. Players have a right to expect a contest that does not devolve into a clock bashing competition unless d0 is explicitly specified. An explicit d0 is an exception to traditional practice. A d5 on a G/25 event is an exception to traditional practice (these events were NOT G/25 events traditionally; they were G/30 events, and the organizers only flipped after the Delegates rightly told them to stop knocking off time). CCA’s delay of ten seconds is an exception to traditional practice.
Let’s put the burden of full disclosure on those who insist on departing from traditional practice, and have a standard to fill the gap when–not if–an advertiser fails to disclose.
One question is “what is traditional practice for G/25?”
It used to be that G/30 had an assumed/virtually-automatic d5 and it was assumed/virtually-automatic for many organizers to deduct the delay time on delay games, leaving G/30 and G/25;d5 on the clocks with the time control being dual-rated. Some evening tournaments and a number of scholastic tournaments were like that. Then the rule was changed so that a non-delay clock would not have any more base time than a delay clock, with the result that the de facto G/25;d5 that had always been dual rated would have been treated as quick only without the subsequent change (adding both base time in minutes and delay in seconds to see if it crosses the 30 mark or the 65 mark).
So you had a number of formerly G/30 (which were really either G/30;d0 or G/25;d5) becoming G/25;d5. You also had a number of formerly G/25;d3 which stayed G/25;d3. G/25 became the time control where the delay was uncertain without more information.
As so many threads meander like great Mississippi River creating entirely new lines. perhaps this post is either on-topic
or creating a new stream, or merely a new lake.
In the attempt to establish new scholastic venues, the amount
of time a tournament takes really should be an important topic
of discussion. Yes, I do realize in many locales, the scholastic
options generally are G/60+. While these are idea for the established “hooked” young players, they do very little to compel
new growth in the scholastic market. Ran a G/30 no time delay
scholastic recently, starting at about 10:30 and ending around
3pm for the top K-12 Section. While most of the other sections were complete by 1:30 pm in this 4 round tournament, the more
advanced players as to be expected, did use most of their allotted time.
But the truth of the matter is this–for many parents of
new prospective young chess players, 3 hour tournaments are WAY too long. Think of this–most youth sports events are over
within two hours. If we as USCF are to compete for the ‘soccer
mom’ market, then tournaments which more adequately meet their time expectations may be in order.
Rob Jones
We will run events with G30 d5 5 rounds for younger players and g45 or g60 d5 for junior high/high school but only 4 rounds. Those sections are usually smaller anyway.
I’ve done g45 d5 for junior high and g60 d5 for HS too. I’ve also had events for the JH/HS where we did a shorter time control in early rounds when there are likely more mis-matches and then longer time controls for the later rounds. That also shortens the day.
G30d5 5 rounds through K5 if we start at 9am the K-1 kids are usually out before 2pm and the K-3 K-5 are usually out by 3pm at the latest. That is because the rounds don’t usually go the whole time. We are also aggressive about adding clocks to games that might not have one. With young players adding a clock frequently gets a game over quickly.
I still think that, if getting an event over with quickly is the main concern, one could run G/20 d10 controls, still have it dual rated, and probably get each round done 5-10 minutes faster.
I have no position on this matter, either way. I just thought I would point out that the online announcements for the Spring Nationals now advertise full time control information for all main and side events.
My suspicion is that announcements put out by USCF are, at least in part, copied from a template or previous announcement. I also suspect that future announcements will comply with the new standard.
I get somewhat mixed reviews for duration of the 5-round G/30;d5 events I do (10 AM start). With an ASAP schedule the non-rated section takes maybe 2 to 3 hours while the K-3 and K-5 sections take closer to 3.5 to 4 hours. For the older players it is more on the order of 5.5 to 6 hours, and the parents of those kids often like the idea of being able to drop them off and return later after spending the time getting other things done without the kids in their hair.
For that matter, a number of the younger kids have groups of parents with only one or two staying (that one or two sometimes rotating in a group) while the others take care of other things. For parents not staying on site a longer tournament is reasonable and, to a certain extent, desirable.
Expectations have changed over the decades. When I started directing Saturday K-8 scholastics it was common for tournaments to start at 9 AM and have the slowest section finish at 8 PM (early to mid 1980s). Posting first round pairings without trying to get a perfect check-in list (and making first round floor pairings to adjust them) resulted in shaving 20 to 90 minutes of that time (the check-ins always either missed somebody or had a coach checking in a player that wasn’t really there so there were first round floor pairings anyway). Quicker time controls shaved off another hour or two. Computer pairings shaved a little time (maybe 15-30 minutes total) but freed up the back room to also help on the floor and allowed quickly awarding trophies without making cumulative the first tie-break. The rise in the number of tournaments made them smaller (10 tournaments of 75-125 players instead of 4 tournaments of 150-300 players) and thus the individual events had a better chance of not having a long-running game in some of the rounds, resulting in saving maybe another hour. Simple efficiency gains due to experience speeds things up as well.
Dropping that 11 hours to 9 made a lot of parents happy. The percentage of parents who were noticably happier with each successive drop became smaller and smaller. Any speed-up will probably may more parents happier than not, but at some point it will make a significant number of parents unhappy (parents have less time away from the kids, coaches see lower quality games, etc.).
Keep an eye on your local marketplace and see what works there. Heck, maybe a mixture will work best (some 4-rd G/25;d5, some 5-rd G/45;d5, some 4-rd G/60;d5, etc.)
Agreed completely. I think it’s good that USCF requires full time control info in TLAs. I think it’s good to encourage full time control info in ‘any’ publicity. Thus my nagging my friend to add “d5” to the “G/40” in his emails and FB messages about upcoming events.
What I question is USCF mandating that everyone do as my friend now does, with private publicity. First there is the question of whether the Fed has any authority over private publicity. Then the practical issue: How do they plan to monitor private publicity and take corrective action, if applicable?
I agree in principle that the more info the better. But the rule passed last year is what folks on city councils and school boards call an unfunded mandate: Here is another rule for you to enforce—even though that’s darn near impossible with the resources at hand.
And as someone who has played and occasionally directed USCF-rated chess since the dawn of SD rated controls, I can tell you two things: Players have gotten used to 5-second delay in Regular-rated games to the point they assume it, in absence of an announcement otherwise; and chess lawyers do lurk among us.
Not a huge issue, but there is clearly potential for confusion here.
Yes, many players have gotten used to a delay of d5. They tend to think it has been the USCF rule, or at least the default, regardless of the publicity. It is so wonderful for an organizer to have a mutiny on his hands when the players find out that he prefers d0 while they expect d5. 
In one event, the players formed a committee and demanded that the TD/organizer have a time control with a delay. He balked and said that the tournament had to be done by a specified time per the municipality who gave him the use of the hall. Round 1 was about to start and 1/3 of the players were about to demand their money back and leave. He relented and the tournament finished well within the time.
Organizers should always provide full information on tournament details for the players. It is good business. If there is anything vague or missing in the publicity, that gives players a reason not to play. If no prizes are shown or “based on entries”, that is an event to be suspicious of. If no delay is on the tournament specs, expect complaints and tournament problems. If you cannot find the site address using GPS, MapQuest, or GoogleEarth, that is good day to roll over and catch up on your sleep.
There is also another issue: Not all tournament publicity is intended for the same audience.
A TLA, for example, is directed primarily at USCF members, so you can be pretty confident that anyone reading it knows what,
e.g., “G/30;d5” means. But for publicity I’d post on a grocery store bulletin board or hand out at a local (non-USCF) kid’s chess club, I’d spell out G/30 as “30 minutes per player per game” and I’d be hard pressed to find any way to specify d5 that wouldn’t be more likely to confuse than to clarify. The question is whether mentioning delay in publicity intended for people who have never played in a USCF tournament before could have the effect of scaring them off (“I better not go because I don’t know what that means”).
Bob
That’s very true, Bob. Glad at least someone agrees with me.
The USCF cannot and will not monitor all of your publicity flyers. General flyers posted at a store or library can have a barebones message with good artwork to catch the eye. No one expects you to put all of the technical details on that type of flyer. However, if you are dropping flyers off at chess clubs or rated tournaments, you should be putting all of those technical details on delay or increment on the flyer. Don’t be deceptive and surprise the players with a no delay tournament when they arrive at the door. If you do that, don’t be surprised when there is an uproar, people leaving, and problems in running the tournament. When the players are upset they cause more problems and arguments if only to give the TD more headaches.
Trust, good public relations, and competent direction are important to the success of an organizer or TD. Being vague in your approach to publicity is bad for attendance. Being gruff with players or rolling eyes when they ask questions that you have heard a thousand time before is a surefire way to kill your future tournaments. Players see signs. They even read them. The tension of tournament play causes memory lapses. They forget everything. Showing empathy to the players and helping them out builds trust. When you shake their hand and give them a flyer before they leave, they tend to come back. People like to play chess in friendly places. They might even help put away chairs and tables when the tournament is over if they feel that they were treated well.
To do that, they would need to be team events, just like baseball and soccer.
At the elementary school level, G30d5 is reasonable, and the match is over in about an hour-and-a-half. Middle school matches could be G45d5, and high school G60d5 – two-and-a-half hours end-to-end.